Erie Steelhead Artifical Habitat

[skeeter]

I was just googling around and came across this extremely inventive "hatchery" located in BC, Canada. Don't you think that the PFBC could mimic a design like this for Trout Run and put all those fish into a stable, clean, pure spawning habitat like Weaver Creek. A few things I think that might not work other than importing the gravel would be the numbers of returning fish. Unlike salmon, steelhead return 3-4 years to spawn...don't they, and after a while the amount of fish that would want to pack themselves in there would degrade the habitat and eventually destroy the reds. Maybe implement a "tough structure", a structure that only the biggest and toughest steelhead could get through, like a waterfall or a "Conrail tube", haha. Additionally, I wonder if the steelhead produced in those nursery waters would spread out to other streams like the nut and elk. If not force them, like they do already, put those now "wild" spawners in the elk and nut and heck put these spawning channels on the top end of elk and walnut too. It would most likely be a costly endeavor, but these artificial habitats would eventually pay for themselves since there wouldn’t be a such an increased need for a hatchery.

Weaver Creek Intro

Short Video by a blogger Warning: Very odd informational video!

 

[RLeeP]

I think the first thing you'd run into with Elk and Walnut Creeks is the very poor non-surface water source flow of both streams. Neither creek has much in the way of spring input. Even Trout Run, while being in fairly good shape, does not really have the necessary flow attributes. It's gets pretty small, pretty fast as you go up.

Then there's the matter of the substrate, which depending upon how high up the watershed you wanted to put these things would also be a problem. These creeks are basically shale chutes.

Then, of course there's all the property rights issues.

Not to mention that the upper Walnut Creek watershed is seriously degraded by development (to the point where DEP is convening a conference on it in the near future), a situation that has been significantly worsened by Rendell's Folly, the casino on Rt. 97.

Then, as a practical matter, is the issue of how many fish this sort of facility could produce. The fishing pressure is tremendous, completely out of proportion to the stream class and capabilities we're talking about here. I'm skeptical that enough fish could be produced to really mean much.

But, it is a better idea than some of the others I've heard, which include pumping water out of the lake into the upper sections of the stream to ensure good water levels for fishing throughout the season. That one's from outer space, IMO...

Sorry to be a down, but that's my take.

 

[jayL]

Skeeter,

Real interesting post. That sent me off on quite a trip through an internet rabbit hole last night.

That John Chow guy is something else. I've seen him pop up a few times with his money making schemes, but he makes an occasional interesting video or article.

 

[vern]

Very interesting - thanks for the post. I didn't view the informational video, but I think I got the gist.

I didn't see dimensions, but it looks as though it would require several acres on the inside of a meander with the proper slope to be able to maximize the trapped flow minimizing energy use, and potentially very considerable start-up costs - e.g. stabilization of the main stream banks, and creation of the stream channels.

Something like that might be of some limited use on certain trout streams - especially those that are, or could be, of high use, and limited existing capacity (not enough potential natural spawning areas to sustain the desired population density).

Philosophically, however, I don't necessarily agree with going with the high production route, versus working by other means to achieve a naturally sustainable production.